Tonight, five countries — Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, and Slovenia — will be absent from the Eurovision final in Vienna, boycotting the contest in protest against Israel’s participation.
Meanwhile, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) continues to defend a core principle of the competition: that politics plays no role in Eurovision.
Sure.
In theory, governments do not intervene in Eurovision voting (although doing so is not prohibited).
However, according to a New York Times investigation based on unpublished EBU documents and more than 50 interviews, the government of Benjamin Netanyahu has used Eurovision as a soft power tool since 2018, spending more than $1 million to promote Israel’s participation.
Soft power refers to the ability of a country, organization, or individual to influence others through culture, values, reputation, and persuasion rather than force or financial coercion.
In 2024, during Eurovision in Sweden, Israel spent more than $800,000 on Eurovision-related advertising campaigns aimed at encouraging votes and finished second in the televote (fifth overall).
In 2025, in Switzerland, Israel finished first in the televote (second overall), again following online advertising campaigns funded by the Israeli government and distributed in multiple languages.
In both years, the televote placed Israel unusually high, including in countries where public sentiment was widely perceived as strongly pro-Palestinian.
At the same time, Israeli embassies reportedly contacted broadcasters in at least three countries.
Israel’s deputy ambassador to Austria, I. L. Judkovsky, stated that he had worked with members of the Israeli diaspora to mobilize support for Y. Raphael in 2025.
Israeli President I. Herzog also reportedly raised the issue during meetings with foreign leaders, stating that “Israel’s voice must be heard everywhere.”
According to the New York Times investigation, Israel’s efforts may indeed have influenced results. In some countries, participation in televoting is so low that a few hundred people casting multiple votes can significantly affect the outcome.
No evidence was found proving the use of bots. However, the EBU did not publicly release the full voting data. Slovenia reportedly requested access to the data twice but received no response.
According to the report, the EBU conducted internal financial assessments and concluded that it would face losses regardless of its decision.
Excluding Israel risked alienating one group of stakeholders, while allowing participation risked alienating another.
Some estimates suggested Eurovision could lose more than $600,000 depending on how the situation was handled.
The EBU downplayed concerns regarding the voting process and did not conduct a comprehensive public investigation.
It also called for an extraordinary vote regarding Israel’s participation, later canceled that process, and eventually organized a vote in Geneva that effectively resolved the matter through procedural means.
The team of Israeli representative N. Bettan published social media posts encouraging people to vote for him 10 times, the maximum number of votes permitted under Eurovision’s current rules.
The EBU issued an official warning and requested that the posts be removed.
“The use of direct calls encouraging audiences to vote ten times for a specific artist or song is not consistent with either our rules or the spirit of the competition,” said Eurovision Director M. Green.
Historic stuff.
